2023 IDPA rules changes

[matteekay]

30 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

IDPA's popularity in my area is a tiny fraction of USPSA's, and the skillset of the participants is unquestionably higher in the latter.

 

Same here. I still question if these changes are going to be what kills it.

[usmc1974]

21 hours ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

Every time I think of renewing my membership, IDPA does something to make me say

Same here, When I started shooting IDPA back in 96 it was actually fun it was people who did not want to shoot against high capacity high dollar top end specialty equipment. The guns and equipment, was simple. the holsters was simple rules with simple. Fact most of his carried in 1911 well in my area anyway in the clubs I shot with. So pretty much everything that had people shoot IDPA instead of IPSC There was no USPSA at the time, is long gone.

Edited January 18, 2023 by usmc1974

[Johnny_Chimpo]

2 minutes ago, usmc1974 said:

Same here, When I started shooting IDPA back in 96 it was actually fun it was people who did not want to shoot against high capacity high dollar top end specialty equipment. The guns and equipment, was simple. the holsters was simple rules with simple. Fact most of his carried in 1911 well in my area anyway in the clubs I shot with. So pretty much everything that had people shoot IDPA instead of IPSC There was no USPSA at the time, is long gone.

 

IDPA was all I knew from 2006 to 2014.  Back then there were things that I thought were dumb (the subjectivity of cover calls) but I wasn't much into shooting sports so I didn't look at the rulebook with a critical eye.

 

Then I got into USPSA, first dabbled in it in 2014 and 15 then jumped in with both feet in 2019.  I started seriously looking at the structure of both sports and the problems with IDPA became more obvious as I still shot it every once in a while.  Then I got certified as a USPSA RO and started really comparing the training I got and the expectations that were set then against what I saw as officiating in IDPA. 

 

Every time I made a comparison it made me like IDPA less because I kept seeing more and more dumb things, from the crappy way the rulebook is written, to some of the outright stupid things they do in order to NOT copy USPSA, to some of the bizarre rules of the past (flat footed reload, not being able to reload if ran dry in the open)

 

When I shot IDPA in 2022, I did it just because there was nothing better to do.  Now, I think I'd rather run drills at my home club instead.

[Thomas H]

6 hours ago, OpenshooterAclass4lyfe said:

I’m okay with that.   If you know how to shoot from retention properly then a comp or barrel ports make no difference.

 

Craig Douglas would be surprised to hear you say that.  (Especially given his dataset on retention and comps/ports being an issue to shooters in various ways.)

My biggest annoyance with "shooting from retention" is that as people who actually train for this stuff know, when shooting from retention you aren't aiming at high thoracic....that literally isn't how you hold or protect the firearm from grabs at close range, which is literally what "from retention" is all about.

 

As such, unless the MD places the target at about 3 feet in height, you actually have to use extremely poor retention technique to get down zero hits, which is why people often look like they went back to the 90s and are doing a poor rendition of a speed rock.

[Thomas H]

So----the new version says (bold emphasis added by me):

3.10.1.6 When a shooter elects to place a weapon mounted light on their handgun, for use at any time during a match, the shooter will be required to pass an equipment inspection, for the division entered with the box and weight restrictions for the division, with the flashlight mounted as used on the stage. If this is mid match, the shooter will be escorted back to the equipment inspection before moving on to the next stage.

 

...does this make anyone else think that suddenly, we can take off or put on the light whenever we want during a match?  Instead of it needing to be on the gun the entire time?

[rubicon21]

A comp absolutely does help even with minor pf. Ive been shooting CO for about a year and with the new rule I definitely am planning to run a comp gun from now on.

[usmc1974]

3 hours ago, Thomas H said:

So----the new version says (bold emphasis added by me):

3.10.1.6 When a shooter elects to place a weapon mounted light on their handgun, for use at any time during a match, the shooter will be required to pass an equipment inspection, for the division entered with the box and weight restrictions for the division, with the flashlight mounted as used on the stage. If this is mid match, the shooter will be escorted back to the equipment inspection before moving on to the next stage.

WTF? I thought you declared your category at the start of the match and nothing was allowed to change at that point. but, I never take my weapon light off anyway.

Edited January 19, 2023 by usmc1974

[floater]

Is Sig the next IDPA Nats sponsor?

[usmc1974]

1 hour ago, floater said:

Is Sig the next IDPA Nats sponsor?

Maybe it would have been better to post this under match announcements and discussions. Just saying

[Racinready300ex]

14 hours ago, Thomas H said:

So----the new version says (bold emphasis added by me):

3.10.1.6 When a shooter elects to place a weapon mounted light on their handgun, for use at any time during a match, the shooter will be required to pass an equipment inspection, for the division entered with the box and weight restrictions for the division, with the flashlight mounted as used on the stage. If this is mid match, the shooter will be escorted back to the equipment inspection before moving on to the next stage.

 

...does this make anyone else think that suddenly, we can take off or put on the light whenever we want during a match?  Instead of it needing to be on the gun the entire time?

 

It would seem that way, but I also wonder were people already doing this and trying to skirt around passing equipment check with their light on?

 

Why would you want to take the light off mid match? You'll need to swap holsters too, seems like a lot of trouble for no real gain. 

[rowdyb]

Yeah my with light holster is worthless when the pistol has no light.

[floater]

8 hours ago, usmc1974 said:

Maybe it would have been better to post this under match announcements and discussions. Just saying

And Maybe is was a sarcastic comment after hearing Phil on every pod cast trying to say the X Macro isn't comped, but is now IDPA legal but not in USPSA. Just saying.

Edited January 19, 2023 by floater

[Jim Watson]

I got a look at a Macro  and don't see that design having a lot of effect on recoil.  It is functionally the same as those bushing comps for 1911s, it has to clear the barrel in recoil, there is no baffling to direct gas out the slots.

[MarkT]

On 1/17/2023 at 8:43 AM, RangerTrace said:

If they try to tell me my Armadillo concealment vest is no longer legal, I think I will be done with this sport........IDPA is the only thing it's good for.

 

That one could run me off as well.    

[Jim Watson]

I doubt my AC/MD is woke enough to start making fashion pronouncements on guns and attire.  

 

We shall see; my older vest, home sewn by a club member's Mother, has my Team Mediocre logo, my Armadillo has my sponsors' logos (both of them.)

[Carbine_Philosophy]

On 1/16/2023 at 2:23 PM, matteekay said:

Worth noting:

 

As BUG, CCP, and CO all adhere to the ESP ruleset, they can all have ported barrels now. 

Next IDPA match, I'm gonna break out my Performance Center Shield 1.0.

[erwos]

The AC here has ruled that barrel comps are flatly not allowed. I am not sure I agree with this ruling (it's not what the rules actually say), but that's a data point for everyone involved. Guess I'll run my P320 X5L with a ported barrel.

[Jim Watson]

I had thought to start with that an integral compensator would fit the bill, but the more I thought about it, the more I thought there would be rulings like that.

 

That eliminates the Staccato XC, which otherwise seems a good example of the modern ESP.

And Sig says their Spectre Comp is removable which is specifically not allowed.

 

 

[riden]

On 1/19/2023 at 10:17 AM, Jim Watson said:

I got a look at a Macro  and don't see that design having a lot of effect on recoil.  It is functionally the same as those bushing comps for 1911s, it has to clear the barrel in recoil, there is no baffling to direct gas out the slots.

I have one & hard to tell if the ported slide helps or not. Other YT reviews insist that it does. 

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, Jim Watson said:

I had thought to start with that an integral compensator would fit the bill, but the more I thought about it, the more I thought there would be rulings like that.

 

That eliminates the Staccato XC, which otherwise seems a good example of the modern ESP.

And Sig says their Spectre Comp is removable which is specifically not allowed.

 

 

 

From what I understand the xc barrel and comp are over piece so it would be legal in idpa. It's comps that are threaded into barrels that aren't allowed.  

[Jim Watson]

That is what I thought early on but that isn't what erwos' AC said.

Staccato says their XC compensator is "integrated" which I take to mean it is faired into the slide and frame contours, not "integral," one piece with the tube.

 

I will surely ask my AC but I will not see him until next month.  Have to get him to rule on my vest as suitable for wear to the grocery store, too.

 

The Macro seems to be the gun the change was made to suit

 

I am sure we will see a bunch of popple holes, but wonder if the Magnaport Autoport will turn up.  I have seen exactly one of these, many years ago, as a factory feature on the Michigan Armament Co's 1911.   

.

Edited January 24, 2023 by Jim Watson

[erwos]

1 hour ago, riden said:

I have one & hard to tell if the ported slide helps or not. Other YT reviews insist that it does. 

I didn't think it did anything significant on my P365 Macro. I guess there's the possibility it will be more effective on the P320 AXG Legion Comp, but color me skeptical. Ports, on the other hand, worked great. I suspect we will be seeing more ported guns in the near future amongst people who take IDPA seriously, whomever they are.

 

The real moral of this story is that IDPA needs to devolve responsibility for rules questions from ACs to some sort of IDPA NROI. The rules changes this time around partially stemmed from ACs getting it wrong or, more charitably, not being on the same page. There is also the problem that IDPA does not write rules like it is a sport, which is not helpful. Without an IDPA NROI equivalent, it does not seem like the core problem has been fixed.

Edited January 24, 2023 by erwos

[ddc]

12 minutes ago, erwos said:

The real moral of this story is that IDPA needs to devolve responsibility for rules questions from ACs to some sort of IDPA NROI. The rules changes this time around partially stemmed from ACs getting it wrong or, more charitably, not being on the same page. There is also the problem that IDPA does not write rules like it is a sport, which is not helpful. Without an IDPA NROI equivalent, it does not seem like the core problem has been fixed.

 

Until IDPA takes this step it will be impossible for me to take it seriously.

 

I am truly baffled that anybody at IDPA HQ would think the current system makes sense.

[rowdyb]

so which changes will matter most to a shooter, no matter the division? what are the shooter centric changes versus the gun centric ones?

[erwos]

1 hour ago, rowdyb said:

so which changes will matter most to a shooter, no matter the division? what are the shooter centric changes versus the gun centric ones?

There wasn't much. There was some sort of clarification on reloads that I'm still mulling over, but I don't think it had big practical impacts and was more of a clarification.